Liberty Home Guard
Claremary
Liberty Home Guard
Purchased a 42 month policy. Submitted a claim 19 months into the policy regarding 2 AC splits. Three weeks later, Liberty rep tells me they were unable to get a tech to come to my home and told me to hire a tech to submit a report which they would consider. I canceled my policy since I now had to do the work I had hired them to do and I requested my money back as they were unable to fulfill their end of the contract. They agreed to return $140 fee for filing the two claims, but would only partially reimburse me for the amount I paid for coverage they were unable to provide. Expensive cost for 19 months of false "peace of mind". I consider this bordering on fraud and intend to pursue the matter.
Rating: ★
Purchased a 42 month policy. Submitted a claim 19 months into the policy regarding 2 AC splits. Three weeks later, Liberty rep tells me they were unable to get a tech to come to my home and told me to hire a tech to submit a report which they would consider. I canceled my policy since I now had to do the work I had hired them to do and I requested my money back as they were unable to fulfill their end of the contract. They agreed to return $140 fee for filing the two claims, but would only partially reimburse me for the amount I paid for coverage they were unable to provide. Expensive cost for 19 months of false "peace of mind". I consider this bordering on fraud and intend to pursue the matter.
Rating: ★
angie
Liberty Home Guard
We paid for three year policy. They treated it like a one year policy. Once we had a second claim on out havc they said we needed to replace the system and would contribute about $800 on a $6700 system. They wanted their substandard vendor to do the work. We called a heat and air company and paid out of pocket $125 for a part replacement. Been working ever since. We asked to cancel the policy and they said we could but it would cost us $50 fee and there would be no refund for the two years we paid in advance for. Criminals and unethical in our Opinion.
Rating: ★
We paid for three year policy. They treated it like a one year policy. Once we had a second claim on out havc they said we needed to replace the system and would contribute about $800 on a $6700 system. They wanted their substandard vendor to do the work. We called a heat and air company and paid out of pocket $125 for a part replacement. Been working ever since. We asked to cancel the policy and they said we could but it would cost us $50 fee and there would be no refund for the two years we paid in advance for. Criminals and unethical in our Opinion.
Rating: ★
fred
Liberty Home Guard
Case Summary This case concerns Liberty Home Guard’s handling of a water‑heater failure under an active home‑warranty policy. The plaintiff alleges improper denial of a covered claim, unauthorized account suspension during an active dispute, failure to participate in contractually required arbitration, and conduct inconsistent with the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. --- Key Facts - Technician Diagnosis: A licensed technician confirmed internal mechanical failure inside the water heater and stated the leak was the result of the failure, not the cause. No corrosion, rust, or structural degradation was identified. - Claim Denial: Liberty Home Guard denied the claim by reclassifying the failure as a storage tank exclusion, contradicting the technician’s findings. - Account Suspension: Plaintiff’s account was placed into Pending Cancellation without request or consent, blocking access to the policy and preventing claim submission during an active dispute. - Arbitration Demand: Plaintiff issued a formal Demand for Arbitration under Section K.6 of the Agreement. - Non‑Participation: Liberty Home Guard acknowledged receiving the arbitration demand but did not initiate arbitration with AAA or any administrator. - Conditional Compensation: Liberty Home Guard offered compensation only if the plaintiff cancelled the policy and signed a release. - Regulatory Impasse: The Tennessee Division of Consumer Affairs closed the case due to impasse, documenting that Liberty Home Guard refused to resolve the dispute. --- Legal Issues - Breach of Contract — Denial inconsistent with technician findings; interference with plaintiff’s ability to use the policy. - Interference With Contract Performance — Unauthorized Pending Cancellation status during an active dispute. - Failure to Participate in Arbitration — Ignoring a formal arbitration demand required under the Agreement. - Unfair or Deceptive Acts (TCPA) — Misrepresentation of technician findings, conditional compensation, portal restrictions, contradictory statements to regulators. --- Damages Sought - Actual damages: $2,750 - Consequential damages: $600 - Emotional distress: $5,000 - Treble damages under TCPA: $25,050 - Court costs: $200 - Total Requested: $25,000 (cap) --- Procedural Posture - Policy remains active. - Plaintiff complied with all contractual dispute‑resolution requirements. - Liberty Home Guard did not initiate arbitration. - Regulatory mediation concluded with an impasse. - Plaintiff is filing in Montgomery County General Sessions Court. --- Relief Requested - Judgment for $25,000 - Court costs - Any additional relief deemed appropriate by the Court
Rating: ★
Case Summary This case concerns Liberty Home Guard’s handling of a water‑heater failure under an active home‑warranty policy. The plaintiff alleges improper denial of a covered claim, unauthorized account suspension during an active dispute, failure to participate in contractually required arbitration, and conduct inconsistent with the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. --- Key Facts - Technician Diagnosis: A licensed technician confirmed internal mechanical failure inside the water heater and stated the leak was the result of the failure, not the cause. No corrosion, rust, or structural degradation was identified. - Claim Denial: Liberty Home Guard denied the claim by reclassifying the failure as a storage tank exclusion, contradicting the technician’s findings. - Account Suspension: Plaintiff’s account was placed into Pending Cancellation without request or consent, blocking access to the policy and preventing claim submission during an active dispute. - Arbitration Demand: Plaintiff issued a formal Demand for Arbitration under Section K.6 of the Agreement. - Non‑Participation: Liberty Home Guard acknowledged receiving the arbitration demand but did not initiate arbitration with AAA or any administrator. - Conditional Compensation: Liberty Home Guard offered compensation only if the plaintiff cancelled the policy and signed a release. - Regulatory Impasse: The Tennessee Division of Consumer Affairs closed the case due to impasse, documenting that Liberty Home Guard refused to resolve the dispute. --- Legal Issues - Breach of Contract — Denial inconsistent with technician findings; interference with plaintiff’s ability to use the policy. - Interference With Contract Performance — Unauthorized Pending Cancellation status during an active dispute. - Failure to Participate in Arbitration — Ignoring a formal arbitration demand required under the Agreement. - Unfair or Deceptive Acts (TCPA) — Misrepresentation of technician findings, conditional compensation, portal restrictions, contradictory statements to regulators. --- Damages Sought - Actual damages: $2,750 - Consequential damages: $600 - Emotional distress: $5,000 - Treble damages under TCPA: $25,050 - Court costs: $200 - Total Requested: $25,000 (cap) --- Procedural Posture - Policy remains active. - Plaintiff complied with all contractual dispute‑resolution requirements. - Liberty Home Guard did not initiate arbitration. - Regulatory mediation concluded with an impasse. - Plaintiff is filing in Montgomery County General Sessions Court. --- Relief Requested - Judgment for $25,000 - Court costs - Any additional relief deemed appropriate by the Court
Rating: ★